Religious Controversies: Homosexuality

[quote]BBriere wrote:
I guess I’ve never really understood the homosexual religious debate. The Bible makes it clear that the practice of homosexuality is a sin. It makes a lot of things people do a sin. If you believe in the Bible, then you believe it’s a sin. If you don’t, then you can believe what you want.

The Bible never calls for the persecution of homosexuals. I have family and friends that are gay. I could really care less. I also have family and friends that are heavy drinkers. It’s pretty much the same thing. They’re sinners. So am I. I guess I never understood why people make such a big deal about homosexuals vs. other things.[/quote]

Because they’re bigots. They look for excuses to justify their hatred/contempt/distrust/lotsofotherbadwords towards homosexuals, and conveniently find that within religion.

The fact that other people they know, and most likely they themselves, do other things the bible says are wrong just proves that they dont actually care what the bible says, until it coincides with their own bigotry.

Just like not caring about a myriad of factors that result in a lower fertility rate… till they can make a loose connection between that and gay marriage… :slight_smile:

Such a true post. It cracks me up how people have changed the bible to appease their lifestyle yet are up in arms against gay marriage.

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

Just like not caring about a myriad of factors that result in a lower fertility rate… till they can make a loose connection between that and gay marriage… :)[/quote]

You’re kidding, right?

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Marriage is the only place sex is allowed[/quote]

Are you married?

If not, you better be a virgin.[/quote]

not sure if even marriage would work for you . . . given your constant masturbatory references in practically every thread you have ever posted in, it would seem that is the only topic you could actually claim expertise in . . .

OP stated,

“…I’m a Christian and someone asked me a few years ago if being gay was wrong. I said yes, but I couldn’t explain why. Reading various responses from here can help many understand the opposing argument to better formulate reasons as to why you believe what you believe. Then you won’t be dumb founded like me and provide no response…So, is homosexuality a sin, or is it another healthy variation of human sexuality?”

First, let us scripturally get something straight (no pun intended).

“…there is none righteous, no, not one:” (Rom. 3:10), “For all have sinned…” (Rom. 3:23), and “…the wages of sin is death…” (Rom. 6:23).

Jesus Christ himself declares that homosexuality is a sin, “…That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornication, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defiles the man.” (Mark 7:20-23).

“Fornication” (Gk. porneia), means any type of unlawful sexual acts outside of marriage. Porneia, which is relatively rare in classical Greek, originally stood for “prostitution.” In other, later contexts it denotes “unchasity, illicit sexual relations” of any kind (“fornication” is a somewhat archaic but common translation).

Various forms of the stem zanah (“illicit intercourse”) are rendered by porneia in the Septuagint. Literally, porneia means “prostitution, illicit intercourse, habitual sexual immorality.”

Literal uses of porneia in the N.T. relate to habitual sexual immorality, illicit sex, and adultery (Matt. 19:9).

In the beginning, woman was created to be a loving companion for man (Gen. 2:18) and God ordained marriage and the family unit as the first and most important institution on earth. Man and woman were charged with being fruitful and were created to form family relationships. This stated purpose of God in creation indicates that He considers a godly family and the raising of children of the utmost priority in the world (Gen. 1:28).

God’s plan for marriage consists of one male and one female, two different sexes to become “one flesh” (i.e., united physically and spiritually, Gen. 2:24).

Thus, “fornication” would include heterosexual relations before marriage, adultery, and homosexual relations at any time (Matt. 15:18-20; I Cor. 6:9-10).

[quote]blacksheep wrote:
OP stated,

“…I’m a Christian and someone asked me a few years ago if being gay was wrong. I said yes, but I couldn’t explain why. Reading various responses from here can help many understand the opposing argument to better formulate reasons as to why you believe what you believe. Then you won’t be dumb founded like me and provide no response…So, is homosexuality a sin, or is it another healthy variation of human sexuality?”

First, let us scripturally get something straight (no pun intended).

“…there is none righteous, no, not one:” (Rom. 3:10), “For all have sinned…” (Rom. 3:23), and “…the wages of sin is death…” (Rom. 6:23).

Jesus Christ himself declares that homosexuality is a sin, “…That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornication, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defiles the man.” (Mark 7:20-23).

Good post man. Since the bible is pretty clear on this, I guess there really isnt much else to say. Other than yes it is wrong for some to put homosexuals on a pedistal when all sins are equal. Its no worse than stealing or lying(which I believe it was Irish who stated that lying causes more damage, I totally agree). Now if anyone still wants to throw aroung “bigots” to those of us who you know our stance on this, well I guess there isnt much we can say anymore other than youre making yourselves look like way bigger bigots than we supposively are
“Fornication” (Gk. porneia), means any type of unlawful sexual acts outside of marriage. Porneia, which is relatively rare in classical Greek, originally stood for “prostitution.” In other, later contexts it denotes “unchasity, illicit sexual relations” of any kind (“fornication” is a somewhat archaic but common translation).

Various forms of the stem zanah (“illicit intercourse”) are rendered by porneia in the Septuagint. Literally, porneia means “prostitution, illicit intercourse, habitual sexual immorality.”

Literal uses of porneia in the N.T. relate to habitual sexual immorality, illicit sex, and adultery (Matt. 19:9).

In the beginning, woman was created to be a loving companion for man (Gen. 2:18) and God ordained marriage and the family unit as the first and most important institution on earth. Man and woman were charged with being fruitful and were created to form family relationships. This stated purpose of God in creation indicates that He considers a godly family and the raising of children of the utmost priority in the world (Gen. 1:28).

God’s plan for marriage consists of one male and one female, two different sexes to become “one flesh” (i.e., united physically and spiritually, Gen. 2:24).

Thus, “fornication” would include heterosexual relations before marriage, adultery, and homosexual relations at any time (Matt. 15:18-20; I Cor. 6:9-10).[/quote]

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Marriage is the only place sex is allowed[/quote]

Are you married?

If not, you better be a virgin.[/quote]

not sure if even marriage would work for you . . . given your constant masturbatory references in practically every thread you have ever posted in, it would seem that is the only topic you could actually claim expertise in . . .[/quote]

Don’t project your virginity or inability to attract women who were born after the 1930s on me.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Marriage is the only place sex is allowed[/quote]

Are you married?

If not, you better be a virgin.[/quote]

not sure if even marriage would work for you . . . given your constant masturbatory references in practically every thread you have ever posted in, it would seem that is the only topic you could actually claim expertise in . . .[/quote]

Don’t project your virginity or inability to attract women who were born after the 1930s on me.[/quote]

your masturbatory fantasies are not related to my life in any way except your constant reference to them in these threads . . . if that was supposed to be a retort or a putdown, you’ve once again failed on an epic scale . . .

Well I’ve been away for a bit, mainly due to work, but damn am I gonna have a lot of reading material tonight! I never expected it to reach 14 pages. There’s some damn good stuff in here and I appreciate all who have contributed (even if it did get a bit out of hand).

I’d like to know why Cap would be against the marriage of more than 2 people?

Keeping with someone’s mention that you have to justify A to B to C etc. to justify A to Z (A being hetero marriage and Z being 20 single Mums on Facebook) I figure the next step after homo marriage would be any gender combination of three people… why would that be ‘legitimate restriction’ Cap? Are you saying that it’s not possible for three individuals to cultivate a marriage-like relationship among themselves? I can’t see how that could reasonably be argued, but I’d be interested in the attempt if that is your stance. If it isn’t, then how could you possibly bar them from marriage?

[quote]Cameron_Phillips wrote:
I’d like to know why Cap would be against the marriage of more than 2 people?

Keeping with someone’s mention that you have to justify A to B to C etc. to justify A to Z (A being hetero marriage and Z being 20 single Mums on Facebook) I figure the next step after homo marriage would be any gender combination of three people… why would that be ‘legitimate restriction’ Cap? Are you saying that it’s not possible for three individuals to cultivate a marriage-like relationship among themselves? I can’t see how that could reasonably be argued, but I’d be interested in the attempt if that is your stance. If it isn’t, then how could you possibly bar them from marriage?
[/quote]

As of right now poligamy is against the law in the United States. In the State of Texas Sodomy is against the law, but if the Federal Government allows same sex marriages the Texas law would be gone. I guess poligamy law could be changed also.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Marriage is the only place sex is allowed[/quote]

Are you married?

If not, you better be a virgin.[/quote]

I have been forgiven of my sins. :slight_smile:

[quote]Cameron_Phillips wrote:
I’d like to know why Cap would be against the marriage of more than 2 people?

Keeping with someone’s mention that you have to justify A to B to C etc. to justify A to Z (A being hetero marriage and Z being 20 single Mums on Facebook) I figure the next step after homo marriage would be any gender combination of three people… why would that be ‘legitimate restriction’ Cap? Are you saying that it’s not possible for three individuals to cultivate a marriage-like relationship among themselves? I can’t see how that could reasonably be argued, but I’d be interested in the attempt if that is your stance. If it isn’t, then how could you possibly bar them from marriage?
[/quote]

This is a trap.

If I say I agree with poly marriage, it’s evidence I’m a terrorist out to destroy the american family and proof of the slippery slope… next up I’ll be suggesting it’s just fine and dandy to rape 8 year olds!

And If I say I disagree with poly marriage, then I’m “discriminating” against the polyamorous, and I’m as much a bigot as the folks who protest funerals with “God Hates Fags” signs…

amirite?